Excellent news. Sgt Alexander Blackman has his sentence reduced.

It doesn't sound as if you have a problem sorting out how you feel about it Badenkate
We will all have our own views on this matter.Every soldier is held responsible for his actions, unless directed to do something by a commanding officer, so that is why he is being prosecuted.

He killed a wounded man in cold blood and he was quite able to understand that this was a war crime, and to suggest ut was kept quiet.

The difference between the helicopter gun ship firing on the enemy in action and a soldier on the ground casually dispatching a wounded soldier is quite clear. One is against the Geneva Convention and he knew it.

Luckygirl'You have eloquently summed up how a lot of people feel I would guess. We can only begi to imagine the horror of combat, but if all the men who had been traumatised were deemed unfit for service Baden!there wouldn't have been many left to fight. I believe they were not supposed to be wearing helmet cameras, but as some were wearing them and then foolishly saw fit to circulate the footage, the powers that be had no choice but to act.

I agree POGS War is a terrible thing and I'm grateful that neither of my sons has had to fight in one

It may not have been that the other soldier 'foolishly saw fit to circulate the footage'. It may have been that the other soldier was aghast at what he had witnessed and knew it was wrong. For whatever reason, it was evidence of the wrongdoing and had to be acted upon.

Soldiers are under incredible pressure and this troup had been instructed to be tough on the enemy. Whatever that meant.

You're right roses that I'm clear that I consider it a war crime. What I'm more uncertain about is where the blame should be put - the soldier who actually committed it or the commander who sent him out into the field knowing the state of his mind.

What depresses me more is the apparently prevailing attitude that it was OK to shoot an enemy in cold blood while he was lying injured on the floor because that's what they did to others. Is this our yardstick for future conflicts - we do to them whatever they do however horrific? Where do we draw the line? Do we behead enemy soldiers or civilians? Or do we conform to the Geneva Convention which was enacted to prevent exactly this behaviour?

We were fighting to maintain civilized behaviour in the world - to join in that behaviour negates the whole point, however much we may be aware of possible extenuating circumstances.

This is from The Independent 2013

"The video footage was recorded by the helmet camera that, contrary to regulations, Marine B was wearing.
It was discovered on the laptop of a civilian who took it in to a shop to be repaired. The computer allegedly contained offensive images, unconnected with Afghanistan, and the police were called. They discovered scenes of a prisoner being mistreated and his captors – the Marines – discussing killing him.
The servicemen were identified, and the helmet camera seized by the Royal Military Police. This contained further footage: that of the killing."
So someone was circulating it for gratuitous viewing .

Having put in my possibly irrelevant comments,I think he's been punished enough and should be allowed to return to his family.

True, I think that with normal ( for want of a better word) armies, there is more respecting the Geneva Convention, regarding the rules of war.When fighting against rag tag armies like the Taliban, and soldiers knowing what these people are like and what they do ( they see it firsthand in the villages) there is no respect, as there would be for professional soldiers of an enemy country.It will be the same against ISIS, who are cruel sadistic men, in it for their own power and enjoyment.This lack of respect by our soldiers ( or anyone elses) must play a part.

Even way back in WW1, wounded enemy soldiers were captured and treated alongside allied soldiers. Although sure this obviously wasn't always the case, shooting dead a wounded enemy was not approved army policy.

ygg
the taliban fighter was fighting for what he believed in in his country. He wasn't a professional trained soldier.
Sorry, but that is not true. The Taliban are not fighting for their country and they are killing Afghan citizens, the British forces were helping the Afghan people to defeat the Taliban.
The Taliban is an ultra-conservative religious and political militant organization that attempts to enforce Sharia law and Islamic government throughout the Middle East and in other lands. The group is known to excommunicate or kill those who do not follow their radical interpretation of Islamic beliefs.

The Taliban are guilty of the most horrendous crimes against The Afghan people.
rosesarered that is right.

Thanks POGS and I am pleased that the campaign has had a good result.

However, how many times has this happened on all sides in war and conflict? Perhaps Sgt Blackman did the wrong thing but he should never had been charged with murder.

How do judges, politicians, lawyers know what it would feel like to be in an area of conflict like this, to see your comrades' body parts being strung up in trees by a vicious enemy such as the Taliban, come across little girls who had been fatally wounded by them as glammanana mentions?

I hope he is able to rebuild his life with the help of his wife.

whitewave and Luckygirl

He was a Sergeant and as such probably far more experienced than any young graduate entrants who would be destined for officer rank.
And of course, as such, should have probably known better but was under extreme stress without proper backup from the officer rank.

the command that put him in that position is responsible for the murder - which is what it was

Well, Badenkate apparently it was not a murder according to the latest judgement.

vulnerable adults with a lack of intellectual skills do not make the rank of sergeant.
Although I agree the Army can bring order and discipline to what were chaotic lives and provide opportunities and skills which would not have been achieved otherwise.

Did anybody watch Panorama last night.

' Marine A/ The Inside Story.

The story was told by journalist Chris Terrill who has spoken to Sgt. Blackman several times and had previously made a documentary which followed Sgt. Blackmans Royal Marines unit 4.2 commando in Afghanistan . Terrill had embedded himself with 4.2 Commando to film the action in Helmand on 2011 and knew the area and what they went through . He said this documentary 'took you back to the day it happened' .

Whilst he was filming in Camp Bastion 4.2 Commando had just arrived to embark on a mission. Blackman wasn't there he was held back defending his check post from enemy attack. The task force was sent to establish an out post deep in the territory and provide intelligence and combat patrols. On the film in 2011 Terrill spoke to officer Major Steve McCulley /Officer Commanding.

Within a week 2 marines and an interpreter were dead and several marines were injured with life threatening injuries, including Major McCulley who was 'severely injured' and lucky to be alive.

One of Blackmans fellow comrades told of his anxiety issues and he showed Terrill the Radio Logs for the actual day of the killing, there was gun fight after gun fight with the insurgents, lord knows what else was going on with grenades and IED'S going off.

They were part of 4.2 Commandos deployed to Helmond in NAD - E - ALI. It was in the north where 4 . 2 Commandos were deployed in the north where the fighting was most dangerous as they had pushed the insurgents from the south to the north. 650 marines were deployed.

Patrols were sent out twice a day , IED's were everywhere and every footstep was a dice with death, it was nicknamed ' Afghan Roulette ', they were kitted out in 50 degrees heat, the corn fields even hotter. Bomb disposal teams were trying to make it safe for the local villagers saved from the Taliban. Casualties mounted.

They would see children being shot and beaten, limbs hanging from trees, friends blown up and all the time they were braced for enemy attack they were trying to work with the local people to win ' hearts and mind '. They had to do that day after day.

There was a recording where you hear Sgt Blackman say on his radio of the injured Taliban fighter , " Hate to say it but administering first aid to this individual, he's not long for this world over". They patched him up with field dressing. A discussion followed about getting the fighter out but that would have endangered not only them but those detailed to enter into a battle area and get him back to Camp Bastion. These would take 5 vehicles travelling over roads that are IED'd or Air removal which would have been a sitting duck for the Taliban to shoot down. They then found the insurgent still had a grenade in his pocket and then what happened , happened.

I know I may share a different view from some posters but I can totally see how whilst the action Sgt. Blackman took was wrong on some counts I for one remain perfectly happy to see his conviction for murder reduced to manslaughter and for what it's worth I think he did the right thing given the moment and circumstances he found himself in and I know that may shock some to even comprehend.

I hope I have given a fair account of the Panorama program but I am aware others may interpret it differently .

Whitewave

" I would never encourage a young person to join the services as an ordinary rank. They are under prepared for what they have to deal with, it would appear poorly commanded and lack support on retur "

In other words thrown to the dogs.

I think you should see the injuries sustained by Major Steve McCulley /Officer Commanding !

I think that to say 'poorly commanded' these days is not true at all.Back in the First World War, yes, sometimes, but Officers have for a long time, been very carefully selective and are as brave and in the midst of danger just as much as the men, and more in most cases as they lead the way.Marines do the most dangerous and incredible job.

I just wonder if some people have not and have never had any connection with the Forces and perhaps take it for granted that we live in a peaceful country.
We mustn't forget war correspondents who have been killed and injured trying to bring us news of the conflicts.

There is, of course, one person who should be in court and that is Anthony Charles Lynton Blair.

And for the information of those who think that a Sergeant could be a vulnerable young man with a lack of intellectual skills:
Sergeant
Sergeant is a senior role of responsibility, promotion to which typically takes place after 12 years depending on ability. Sergeants typically are second in command of a troop or platoon of up to 35 soldiers, with the important responsibility for advising and assisting junior officers.

So, of course, he was an intelligent and experienced soldier and probably should have known better than to do what he did but under the degree of stress he was experiencing, who knows what they would do in those circumstances. The right verdict has been reached now.

I agree that Blair should be prosecuted.

It's easy to see war in black and white terms when you're a civilian safe at home but the soldiers see and do things we can't even imagine.

DH doesn't talk much about his time in Kuwait but occasionally I find things out when he has nightmares. I can't tell you what they're about because they're so horrific but I can totally understand how a soldier's mind works in a different way to a civilians and how damaged they are even though they appear to live 'normal' lives when they come home.

Jalima - no-one has said that this young man was lacking in intellectual skills - I was replying to whitewave's comment that she would not like any of her loved ones to join the forces. I was explaining my experiences with some entrants about whose future I felt very concerned. At no point did I say that this young man fell into that category.

The issue under discussion is the validity of this young man's actions and whether they amounted to murder.